Sgt Barone
CAGiversary!
Great show as always!
We are actually really close to agreeing. My main objection to the dvd double dipping analogy is that in the dvd world, a remaster ties up a completely different set of of people, namely technical resources that are not involved in the creation of films, whereas a remastered game ties up creative resources that would otherwise be working on original content. Choosing the same director for the analogy was a poor choice, but it's just a minor difference. You could just substitute an upcoming director.Your Spielberg analogy doesn't make any sense. The creative teams who make the original games are not the same people who port those games to a new system.
This is where I can't agree. A remastered game doesn't tie up creative resources for new games any more than a remastered DVD does for new films. The developers that do these ports are usually production houses that specialize in this sort of job. For example, Final Fantasy 10 was done by Virtuos, an outsourcing company that doesn't make original content. That budget likely wasn't nearly enough to develop original high profile content from scratch. A Free-to-Play mobile game or two at best. Would that be better? Or I suppose it could be rolled into existing projects. Could the money have been spent on speeding up development of Final Fantasy 15? Probably, but if those dev teams are staffed to capacity and the project is under control, where's the benefit? Throwing infinite money and staff at a project has its drawbacks, too. Just look at Assassin's Creed Unity....whereas a remastered game ties up creative resources that would otherwise be working on original content...
The end result is that for every creative resource tied up with working on a remaster, there is one less resource working on original content.
The DVD comparison is flawed. Most popular DVD's are home releases of what were once new theatrical releases. I think a more apt comparison would be people complaining about film reboots like Spider-Man, Superman & Ghostbusters instead of making new films.This is where I can't agree. A remastered game doesn't tie up creative resources for new games any more than a remastered DVD does for new films. The developers that do these ports are usually production houses that specialize in this sort of job. For example, Final Fantasy 10 was done by Virtuos, an outsourcing company that doesn't make original content. That budget likely wasn't nearly enough to develop original high profile content from scratch. A Free-to-Play mobile game or two at best. Would that be better? Or I suppose it could be rolled into existing projects. Could the money have been spent on speeding up development of Final Fantasy 15? Probably, but if those dev teams are staffed to capacity and the project is under control, where's the benefit? Throwing infinite money and staff at a project has its drawbacks, too. Just look at Assassin's Creed Unity.
That's crazy talk, Wombat. Your examples are still brand new movies. They require directors, writers, costume designers, sound designers, actors, cameramen, sets, computer graphics, etc. Remastering games is mostly a matter of going back to assets that already exist and cleaning them up to look and sound better on new hardware. Just like when a DVD or BluRay is made from an old film. There's still a huge amount of work that went into the digital restoration of Lawrence of Arabia (color correction, image enhancement, audio mixing, special features), but it's not like they had to reshoot the damn movie.The DVD comparison is flawed. Most popular DVD's are home releases of what were once new theatrical releases. I think a more apt comparison would be people complaining about film reboots like Spider-Man, Superman & Ghostbusters instead of making new films.
While all three of these hosts play a lot of games, I would not describe any of them as "hardcore" gamers. And when I say that, I mean that none of them are going to have the patience or commitment to appreciate and get satisfaction from a game that requires methodical play and patience. I'm sure Ship played about 30 mins of Dark Souls, died 10 times, and said "nope." Now he's forever biased against From games, and that's his loss. The rest of us stuck with and and found some of the most satisfying and rewarding video game experiences we've ever had.
I like hearing some of the banter, but I don't tune in to the CAGcast for anything beyond a casual gamers perspective. It would be great if this gaming podcast would embrace the GOTY to date, Bloodborne, but you should shift perspective. Ryse is probably the most "hardcore" game these guys will ever champion, and that's a pretty shallow experience as we all know. X, X, X, Y, X, rinse, repeat.
It does get irritating when they imply that there is something wrong with the comminity of fans. We'll have another round of Bloodborne hate when Cheapy comes back after trying it.
(And, no, pimping out your basement with 20 consoles doesn't make you a hardcore gamer - especially when I'm guessing only 3 of those devices will be turned on on a semi-regular basis).
What is this supposed to mean? Did you read any of the other posts? Am I supposed to feel something?
The graphical issues weren't the only issues they raised...They also brought up the laughable price tags. This, in my opinion, is the bigger issue. Can you honestly say that the price discrepancy between which I can acquire GoWIII PS3 ($3) and GoWIII PS4 ($40) is justifiable? Especially when the graphical upgrades are minimal? (no SD to HD this gen!)I don't really get the weird hang-up you guys have for remasters needing to have graphical issues in a previous gen to get remastered/ported to the current generation. That's not why these companies are porting these games over. They're releasing fairly cheap ports to appeal to the crowd on PS4 and Xbox One that didn't play them before, possibly because they didn't own a PS3 or whatever, and would love the opportunity to do so with their new console. Sony's found that they have a large percentage of their PS4 audience that never owned a PS3, so their remasters and PS Now appeal to that demographic that never played it before.
Do you really think PS4 owners that never owned a PS3 are going to go buy a PS3 and that cheap used copy of God of War III because it's cheaper than what they can get on their system? I don't see it being a big seller like The Last of Us was, but as a likely bundle game or sale item, it'll do alright there. That game itself is probably one of the only remasters that sticks out for the price, unless I'm missing something else that's obvious, since they can pack in a bunch of DLC to prop up the price in the same pattern that Game of the Year editions were used throughout last-gen. It was a solid point for that one game in particular, but not something that can be used to trash every other remaster as having the same issue.The graphical issues weren't the only issues they raised...They also brought up the laughable price tags. This, in my opinion, is the bigger issue. Can you honestly say that the price discrepancy between which I can acquire GoWIII PS3 ($3) and GoWIII PS4 ($40) is justifiable? Especially when the graphical upgrades are minimal? (no SD to HD this gen!)
At least last gen, these games were bundled as trilogies AND given the HD treatment before they were put on the market for PS3/360. It's much easier to stomach an HD re-release of all 3 Ratchet games than it is to pay near-full price for ONE game (God of War, Sleeping Dogs, Tomb Raider)...regardless of whether or not I owned the old systems.
I don't think they'll go buy a PS3 for this game, no...and this, despite the fact that a used PS3 and Tomb Raider, Sleeping Dogs, and GoW3 can be acquired for about $100 around here, if you're careful.Do you really think PS4 owners that never owned a PS3 are going to go buy a PS3 and that cheap used copy of God of War III because it's cheaper than what they can get on their system? I don't see it being a big seller like The Last of Us was, but as a likely bundle game or sale item, it'll do alright there. That game itself is probably one of the only remasters that sticks out for the price, unless I'm missing something else that's obvious, since they can pack in a bunch of DLC to prop up the price in the same pattern that Game of the Year editions were used throughout last-gen. It was a solid point for that one game in particular, but not something that can be used to trash every other remaster as having the same issue.